sha 256 - How to deal with collisions in Bitcoin addresses ...

Does proof of work represent a hash collision? /r/Bitcoin

Does proof of work represent a hash collision? /Bitcoin submitted by ABitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Does proof of work represent a hash collision? /r/Bitcoin

Does proof of work represent a hash collision? /Bitcoin submitted by cryptoallbot to cryptoall [link] [comments]

128 Bits of Security and 128 Bits of Security: Know the Difference

submitted by loup-vaillant to crypto [link] [comments]

[self-promo][RELEASED] Learn Bitcoin while playing a game, introducing Bitcoin: Unbiased, Unprejudiced, Fair

[self-promo][RELEASED] Learn Bitcoin while playing a game, introducing Bitcoin: Unbiased, Unprejudiced, Fair
When you are new to the bitcoin world, it looks chaotic. Packed with hundreds of algorithms coming at you every second. Behold! Bitcoin: Unbiased, Unprejudiced, Fair will make it easy. You will learn how blockchain technology works under the hood while playing a game!

Features of Bitcoin: Unbiased, Unprejudiced, Fair -Episode 1:

-Explain the systemic corruption of the Government and the reason why bitcoin is needed.

-Illustrate cryptographic hash functions with examples

-Explain properties of hash function in details, such as determinism and non-collision.

-Illustrate Merkle tree and Merkle root with examples

-Explain Merkle tree verification process in details.



For some reason my game is not properly listed in site, it doesn't show my game even if you search by name, they will hopefully fix this soon.
submitted by furiousTaher to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Conditional payment of Wisdom Chain document knowledge base

If we want to make a transaction now, I want to sell my data to you. what is the safest way of transaction?

Obviously, there are two problems:

To solve the above problem, we need a perfect and accurate "one hand pay, one hand delivery" solution. Zero knowledge proof and blockchain can be used at this time.

Today we try to explain this interesting solution in the language that ordinary people can understand: the conditional payment of Wisdom Chain.

What does this concept mean?

To put it simply, it is to reach a perfect and fair "one hand pay, one hand delivery" scheme without trusting a third party.

Imagine a transaction scenario in which neither party is willing to make payment / delivery to the other party without the presence of a trusted third party, otherwise the other party will run away. One hand payment and one hand delivery means that the payment / delivery action must be atomic.

The so-called perfect fairness means that neither side can take more advantage. However, this concept is an old topic. As early as the 1980s, many scholars have been studying how to achieve a perfect fair trade. But for a long time, it has been agreed that a trusted third party is essential. Later, when Bitcoin was born, we found that it could be done by using the characteristics of blockchain.

How is conditional payment realized in Wisdom Chain?
According to official disclosure, conditional payment in Wisdom Chain is mainly composed of "hash time locking", "hash height locking" and other factors. Here, only hash time locking and hash height locking are discussed.

What is hash time locking?

Hash lock, full name of hash time lock contract, is a new technology implementation form proposed in lightning network.

Hash lock mode is a mechanism that users guess the original value of hash value to pay in a specified period of time. In short, on the basis of the smart contract, both parties lock the assets first. If both parties input the original value of the correct hash value in a limited time, the transaction can be completed.

In this mechanism, we can realize the rapid confirmation of micro payment, that is to say, to achieve the goal of rapid confirmation of lightning network. Next, the author will take the asset exchange of the application scenario of hash locking as an example to explain how hash locking is realized.

How to implement hash time locking? In order to facilitate the understanding of how hash time locking is locked, here we compare two locks, one is hash lock and the other is time lock.

1. Hash lock
Through hash value locking, after locking, only the original value of the hash value is used to unlock. Assuming that the number is 123, the value after hash is a03a. Through a03a locking, without considering hash collision, it can only be unlocked by 123.

2. Time lock
The time lock requires the password for the hash lock to be entered within a specified time. If the time of the time lock is 1 hour, the user is required to enter the password of the hash lock within 1 hour. If the password of the hash lock is input after 1 hour, the time lock will not be opened.

In other words, the condition for opening the two locks at the same time is to input the original value of the hash value within the specified time. In the above example, if "123" is input within one hour, both locks will be in the open state.

Now A will use hash time locking mechanism to exchange its WDC in B for Ethernet currency. The specific steps are as follows:

A first generates random number S, and then give hash value H (S) of random number to B through the network, assuming that the random number is 123, and the hash value is a03a.

This process is equivalent to that B itself has two locks. The hash lock is the same as the hash lock of A. it needs the same password to open it. If the time lock is half an hour.

Through the above process, we can see that A can realize the exchange from WDC to ETH through hash time locking.

Through the above description, we understand the hash time locking, and the following hash height locking will be very simple to understand, and the principle is roughly the same as hash time locking. So let's briefly describe hash height locking.

Hash height lock

A and B can reach an agreement to lock A's 10WDC. Before the arrival of time T (T is expressed in terms of a block chain height in the future), if B can show a suitable R to A so that the hash value of R is equal to the predetermined value H®, B can obtain the 10WDC; if B still fails to provide A correct R until time T has passed, the WDC will automatically unfreeze and return it to A. This process produces random numbers and verifies them.

When you understand hash time lock and hash height lock, you understand the technical principle of conditional payment for WisdomChain.
submitted by Frosty_Gene_7770 to u/Frosty_Gene_7770 [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Maths

While reading through Princeton's Bitcoin book, I came across the ideas of hiding and puzzle friendliness. From how I understood it:
Hiding means that given the solution to hash function H(x|n), with random hash x and nonce n, there is a very large set of potential values that could be x, meaning it is infeasible to try to guess it, or at least would take an unreasonable amount of time.
Puzzle friendliness means that given H(x|n), there are multiple solutions that could be correct, but you would only be able to know if you verified the commitment.
Is my understanding of this correct? If so, doesn't puzzle friendliness mean that it's not collision resistant? I know that for the purposes of cryptocurrency, it's (a) impossible to make it truly collision resistant, and (b) we only care that it's not possible to find a commitment (but it can still exist). But doesn't that still violate the rule of collision resistance?
submitted by Econstudent0467 to math [link] [comments]

Considering the massive hashrate of the network, how long will it be before all possible hashes are produced and we start getting colissions?

Im not considering only the block winning hashes but all the discarded ones too
submitted by Biocrypt to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Information Theory Question

While reading through Princeton's Bitcoin book, I came across the ideas of hiding and puzzle friendliness. From how I understood it:
Hiding means that given the solution to hash function H(x|n), with random hash x and nonce n, there is a very large set of potential values that could be x, meaning it is infeasible to try to guess it, or at least would take an unreasonable amount of time.
Puzzle friendliness means that given H(x|n), there are multiple solutions that could be correct, but you would only be able to know if you verified the commitment.
Is my understanding of this correct? If so, doesn't puzzle friendliness mean that it's not collision resistant? I know that for the purposes of cryptocurrency, it's (a) impossible to make it truly collision resistant, and (b) we only care that it's not possible to find a commitment (but it can still exist). But doesn't that still violate the rule of collision resistance?
submitted by Econstudent0467 to learnmath [link] [comments]

Finding SHA256 partial collisions via the Bitcoin blockchain

This is not a cryptocurrency post, per se. I used Bitcoin's blockchain as a vehicle by which to study SHA256.
The phrase "partial collision" is sometimes used to describe a pair of hashes that are "close" to one another. One notion of closeness is that the two hashes should agree on a large number of total bits. Another is that they should agree on a large number of specific (perhaps contiguous) bits.
The goal in Bitcoin mining is essentially (slight simplification here) to find a block header which, when hashed twice with SHA256, has a large number of trailing zeros. (If you have some familiarity with Bitcoin, you may be wondering: doesn't the protocol demand a large number of leading zeros? It does, kind of, but the Bitcoin protocol reverses the normal byte order of SHA256. Perhaps Satoshi interpreted SHA256 output as a byte stream in little endian order. If so, then this is a slightly unfortunate choice, given that SHA256 explicitly uses big endian byte order in its padding scheme.)
Because Bitcoin block header hashes must all have a large number of trailing zeros, they must all agree on a large number of trailing bits. Agreement or disagreement on earlier bits should, heuristically, appear independent and uniform at random. Thus, I figured it should be possible to get some nice SHA256 partial collisions by comparing block header hashes.
First, I looked for hashes that agree on a large number of trailing bits. At present, block header hashes must have about 75 trailing zeros. There are a little over 2^19 blocks in total right now, so we expect to get a further ~38 bits of agreement via a birthday attack. Although this suggests we may find a hash pair agreeing on 75 + 38 = 113 trailing bits, this should be interpreted as a generous upper bound, since early Bitcoin hashes had fewer trailing zeros (as few as 32 at the outset). Still, this gave me a good enough guess to find some partial collisions without being overwhelmed by them. The best result was a hash pair agreeing on their final 108 bits. Hex encodings of the corresponding SHA256 inputs are as follows:
(I will emphasize that these are hex encodings of the inputs, and are not the inputs themselves.) There were a further 11 hash pairs agreeing on at least 104 trailing bits.
Next, I searched for hashes that agree on a large number of total bits. (In other words, hash pairs with low Hamming distance.) With a little over 2^19 blocks, we have around (2^19 choose 2) ~= 2^37 block pairs. Using binomial distribution statistics, I estimated that it should be possible to find hash pairs that agree on more than 205 bits, but probably not more than 210. Lo and behold, the best result here was a hash pair agreeing on 208 total bits. Hex encodings of the corresponding SHA256 inputs are as follows:
There were 8 other hash pairs agreeing on at least 206 total bits.
So how interesting are these results, really? One way to assess this is to estimate how difficult it would be to get equivalent results by conventional means. I'm not aware of any clever tricks that find SHA256 collisions (partial or full) faster than brute force. As far as I know, birthday attacks are the best known approach.
To find a hash pair agreeing on their final 108 bits, a birthday attack would require 2^54 time and memory heuristically. Each SHA256 hash consists of 2^5 bytes, so 2^59 is probably a more realistic figure. This is "feasible", but would probably require you to rent outside resources at great expense. Writing code to perform this attack on your PC would be inadvisable. Your computer probably doesn't have the requisite ~600 petabytes of memory, anyway.
The hash pair agreeing on 208 of 256 bits is somewhat more remarkable. By reference to binomial distribution CDFs, a random SHA256 hash pair should agree on at least 208 bits with probability about 2^-81. A birthday attack will cut down on the memory requirement by the normal square root factor - among ~2^41 hashes, you expect that there will be such a pair. But in this case, it is probably necessary to actually compare all hash pairs. The problem of finding the minimum Hamming distance among a set doesn't have obvious shortcuts in general. Thus, a birthday attack performed from scratch would heuristically require about 2^81 hash comparisons, and this is likely not feasible for any entity on Earth right now.
I don't think these results carry any practical implications for SHA256. These partial collisions are in line with what one would expect without exploiting any "weaknesses" of SHA256. If anything, these results are a testament to just how much total work has been put into the Bitcoin blockchain. Realistically, the Bitcoin blockchain will never actually exhibit a SHA256 full collision. Still, I thought these were fun curiosities that were worth sharing.
submitted by KillEveryLastOne to crypto [link] [comments]

Difference between smart-contracts and nodes

Difference between smart-contracts and nodes
Greetings. 🤗 In this post we will tell you about the difference between a node and a smart contract.

❓ What is a node?

A node is any computer that is connected to a blockchain network. Simply put, this is the point at which messages can be created, received, or transmitted. For a bitcoin network, for example, there are full nodes, supernodes, miner nodes, and an SPV client.

❓ What is a smart contract?

Smart contracts are computer data transfer protocols that use mathematical algorithms to automatically complete a transaction after meeting established conditions and complete process control. The protocol is used to enter all the terms of the contract concluded between the parties to the transaction in the blockchain. Obligations of participants are provided in the smart contract in the form of "if-then" (for example: "if Party A transfers money, then Party B transfers the rights to the apartment"). Once these conditions are met, the smart contract independently performs the transaction and ensures that the agreement is respected.

❗️ Thus, the smart contract is the action that takes place, and the node is the place where this action takes place.

💡 The Relictum Pro innovative approach

✔️ The distinctive mechanism is as follows: only the hash of one event (transaction) is recorded in the block, and it cannot be changed. Thus, all kinds of collisions are swept aside. In addition to recording the event hash into the block, when forming a new one, the entire hash of the previous block and + integer value is taken (we put the sequential block number in front of the block). There is a main chain of blocks - Master_Chain, which contains only the hash of a block of lower and side smart contracts.

✔️ In parallel with the main Master_Chain, various independent chains are formed - these are smart contracts that organize the three-dimensional distribution, for example:
- first smart contract - generation of tokens;
- second smart contract - sale of goods through the store;
- third - a crypto exchange;
- fourth - delivery of goods, etc.

✔️ Thus, the organization of chains of smart contracts and the main Master_Chain leads to a four-dimensional model of the organization of distribution of blocks.

Read more about Relictum Pro innovative solutions here:
submitted by RelictumPro_official to relictumpro [link] [comments]

Merklix tree for Bitcoin

submitted by jvermorel to btc [link] [comments]

Quantum splice attack on hashes?

So, if I were able to manipulate a block such that the hash matched a hash of another existing block, would that enable me to create a new chain that had blocks spliced into it at some point?
Sha-1 has been cracked.
A whitepaper for using quantum computers to crack sha-3 is here:
We are at sha-256.
What would the consequences of a quantum splice attack look like? Well, for starters, the attackers could not submit any invalid transactions. It would be rejected as an invalid block. Could they mess transaction ordering? Maybe. Remember these are deep in the past. The biggest impact would be that the attacker might be able to control who earned the bitcoins mined at that point. This would invalidate transactions in the present because the initial miner got swapped. This would create all kinds of chaos as blocks became invalid.
The bigger question is how bitcoin would recover. We would recover, no doubts there. The question of how we recover is an important one. Bitcoin probably would need governance in this scenario. Miners, holders, and node runners would both need to have additional channels of communication to the ones they have now.
submitted by Ghostcarapace3 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Anybody want to try and explain the latest insight from Satoshi?

Anybody want to try and explain the latest insight from Satoshi? submitted by DrBaggypants to btc [link] [comments]

How can we guarantee the absence of collisions when hashing files that are larger than the output hash length?

For example, when hashing an 800 bit (100 byte) file with a hashing algorithm that produces hash values of 512 bits. There are 2800 possible variations of the input file, but only 2512 possible output hash values. How can the one-to-one property of hashing algorithms hold up when hashing each possible variation of the input 100 byte file, let alone files with GB or TB sizes?
submitted by KGamesB to askscience [link] [comments]

Hybrix: Blockchain for all chains

Third party services currently assist users to exchange one form of digital cash or asset for another, but a trusted third party is still required to mediate these transactions.
We propose a solution to the problem of these isolated digital currency systems using a meta-level transfer protocol with an extendable and modular design, making accessible any kind of ledger-based economy or other digital cash system for cross-blockchain and inter-systemic transactions.
Every hybrix protocol transaction yields profit to these respective ecosystems by paying transaction fees to their network supporting miners and stakers.
Technically Bitcoin earlier on had solved some of the problems of the reversibility of transactions and trust issues that plagued online commerce new players in the arena are offering replacements for Bitcoin's peer-to-peer payment solution.
Its transactions are stored in a data block inside the attachment section of a zero-value transaction on any distributed ledger system.
Transactions containing meta data pay the usual fees denominated in the base currency Our proposal is to create a protocol - called hybrix protocol -as a cross-ledger colored coin, making it technically borderless and not bound to a single ledger system.
Intersystemic transaction A transaction occurring between two distinct ledger systems.
Entanglement Informational connection between two transactions on separate ledger systems, that functionally relate them as a cross-ledger transaction.
Validator Network actor that analyses past transactions and makes available the legitimacy of these transactions according to the rules of the system protocol.
Double spend A transaction that illegitimately increases the money supply in a ledger system.
Immutability of past transactions attachment The data included with a transaction, sometimes called message or in the case of Bitcoin and its derived coins - OP RETURN. Primarily used on most ledger systems for annotation of the transaction.
Transactions have a unique transaction id OPRETURN An Bitcoin script opcode used to mark a transaction output as an attachment field for storing data 3 invalid.
Figure 2: The parsing function p parses the attachment of the base transaction into the required fields.
Intersystemic Transactions 3.2 Structured Data on a Ledger We define an electronic intersystemic token as a block of structured data that is inserted into the attachment section of a zerovalue transaction on a distributed ledger system.
The content of the attachment of transaction on a base ledger can be parsed into a second layer transaction of the meta ledger.
A parsing function p will extract the required meta transaction details from the base transactions attachment as well as using details from the base transaction that are still relevant.
Token ownership is secured by the underlying ledger system every time a transaction is done.
Each owner transfers their zero-value transaction containing the token data to another owner by digitally signing a hash of the previous transaction and the current transaction.
The only thing that is added to the recipe is the ledger symbol, and transaction hash of where the verification hash can be found.
Subsequently the token is minted on the same address using a followup transaction 3.
cross-ledger entangled transactions Other Types of Transactions tion and then choosing a branch that has not yet been validated.
When a transaction contains more data than a ledger system can handle in its attachmentstorage space, the transaction may be split up, and sent using a transaction accompaniedby tailing part transactions that complete thecontents of the entire operation 7.
A swap transaction is legitimate when the counterparty responds to a swap proposal using a signing transaction.
Finally a burn transaction returns spendable HRC1 token balance to address E on the Ethereum chain 9.
In case of a collision, validators will only accept the recipe that was proven first by way of the genesis transaction.
The older genesis transaction must also be recorded in the recipe, so the chain of mutations can be followed and approved by validators.
Validators check a new incoming recipe for validity first, by comparing its hashes with available data in the blockchain, and authenticating that the updated genesis transaction has been done using the same secret key as the first genesis transaction.
Validation of Transactions DR AF T 6 5 6.1 Mutation of Monetary Supply Validation as a Service External validation should be handled in a decentralized manner using a consensus amongst multiple validator nodes.
If a transaction fee is enforced by the ruleset, the supply is subtracted from on every transaction.
7 7 Examinations 7.1 Validating the Validators Validators need to be rigorously examined in order to find out if they are properly doing their job of validating transactions on the chains.
In the case that all is going according to plan validators check the transactions and record their findings for the public truthfully.
In sending a transaction they can opt to pay a higher fee, and this will result in more validators eager to validate the user's chain of transactions.
A decentralized consensus state database maintained by a pool of validators will consist of a sub tree Tn0 where n increments with each state update, providing a snapshot of the agreed upon valid transaction tree.
To ensure the recovery from a 51% attack on any one single chain, snapshotting by validators could enable network users to request the verification of the current ledger and balances state, regardless of a transaction history tainted by 51% attack damage.
Common hybrix Index Storing the genesis transaction ID, or other hash information in every transaction would require a significant amount of blockchain storage as the volume of transactions grows.
The token protocol Omni, on the contrary, uses an index number for the asset ID in every transaction.
Where less computing and storage resources are available a hybrixjslib client can be used to sign and interpret transactions and get necessary data from a publicly available hybrixd node API. AF T Deterministic Libraries and API Connectors For a meta ledger we define a seed k KL¯ that can be used to generate a corresponding key pair in each base ledger using the function χL¯ : L¯ K(` ) χL,j :K L j DR 9 ψL : KL AL We connect to a large variety of blockchain APIs using a peer-to-peer network daemon called hybrixd 10.
Deterministic functions are used to generate key pairs for all included 10 Conclusion We have proposed a system for meta-level transfers across multiple distributed ledgers 10 Notes without relying on centralized exchanges or decentralized atomic transaction compatibility.
The process of moving value between ledger systems is not controlled by a centralized party, as transactions can be created and signed client-side and sent peer-to-peer among users.
We started with the usual framework of second-layer tokens specified by storing data attached to transactions, which provides a method of accounting on top of existing ledgersystems, but is incomplete without a way to prevent double-spending.
submitted by ramanpandwar to XeraExchange [link] [comments]

SHA1 collision bounty has been claimed

SHA1 collision bounty has been claimed submitted by Gallus to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Relictum Pro unique hashing mechanism

Relictum Pro unique hashing mechanism
Hash and hashing algorithms are key concepts that newcomers to the blockchain know about and which always go hand in hand with security.
To maintain decentralized networks and consensus mechanisms, including Bitcoin or Ethereum with a thousand nodes connected via p2p, a “lack of trust” and an effective confirmation system are necessary. These networks need compact methods of encrypting information that would allow participants to conduct quick and secure checks.
Block is one of the main components of Bitcoin and Ethereum. The block contains information about transactions, timestamps, and other significant metadata. A considerable role in ensuring security is played by the ability to compress large amounts of information about the global network status into short standard messages, which can be easily checked if necessary. These messages are the hash.
Hash algorithms in cryptography are used everywhere. The main areas of their application are the storage of passwords, file verification systems, etc. The essence of these hashes is to use a deterministic algorithm that takes input and creates a string with a fixed length. Thus, the same input will always be converted to the same output.
Determinism is important not only for hashes because even if you change one bit of the input data, you also get a completely different hash.
However, there is a problem with hashing algorithms - this is the inevitability of collisions. Collisions are bad. This means that the attacker who created the collisions can transfer malicious files while hiding under the correct hash. A good hash function should make it more difficult for attackers to find ways to create an input with the same hash value.
The process of calculating the hash should not be too effective since in this case, attackers can easily calculate collisions. Hash algorithms must be resistant to the attacks of finding the pre-image. It is necessary to complicate the process of calculating steps to find the initial value from which the hash was created (for example, the inverse image).
Relictum Pro is a supplemented modification of SHA1-based hashing mathematics. The main advantage of it is in converting from 20 bytes to 32 bytes (in your own hash). This gives a high crypto-stability, including from a promising quantum computer.
submitted by RelictumPro_official to relictumpro [link] [comments]

A brief of QRL

Quantum Resistant Ledger(QRL)is a blockchain network which is designed to resist quantum attacks. The founder of QRL, Peter Waterland is one of the earliest group of people who have worryies about the safty of Bitcoin, Etherreum and other blockchain network which use ECDSA or similar algorithums.
With the developement of the quantum computing technologies, the encryption algorithums of these cryptocurrencies will have no effect someday in the future for sure.
QRL figured out a way to slove this problem, it uses a hash-based eXtended Merkle Tree Signature Scheme (XMSS) to encrypt the message. To make a long story short, QRL utilitize the cryptographic method with minimum security requreiment that rely only upon on the collision resistance of cryptographic hash function. the hash-based digital signature scheme is generated from such function. Such signartue is called one time signatures(OTS), which could only be safely used for one time in encrypt the message, so for each address QRL use many OTS which is generated by a binary hash tree, also know as Merkle Tree.
QRL is programmed with python and The total amount of QRL token is 105,000,000. Now the QRL ranked No. 62 in It also allows developers to easily build applications on its platform.
Official Website:
Block Browser:
Mining software: Xmirg
Operating system: Windows, Linux
Mining equipment: CPU
Mining tutorial:
submitted by DxPool-official to QRL [link] [comments]

Doug Polk's Charlie Lee interview just revealed why there is so much FUD around IOTA

Doug Polk's interview with Charlie Lee basically revealed why there are so many people having a negative attitude towards IOTA.
You can watch the interview here: 1:08:12 is about IOTA
Here are some Charlie Lee quotes from the interview:
"I haven't spent too much time looking at IOTA."
"I did comment on it but without really spending time on figuring out what's true and what's false."
"I only know what I heard and what I kind of superficially looked at”
I think Charlie Lee basically showed us why there is so much FUD around IOTA. People just don’t inform themselves but repeat what they heard. And considering there was a real FUD campaign by the DCI it’s not surprising how negative many peoples attitude towards IOTA is. People need to start to inform themselves and make own decisions.
submitted by Tetimemonen to Iota [link] [comments]

How long before Bitcoin private keys are cracked?

I saw this this site which gives estimates. Anyone have thoughts?
submitted by gjgjhyyt77645tyydhg5 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Could anyone reverse engineer private keys from public ones? I know it's meant to be impossible, but...

Surely whatever the future brings, it will bring UNTOLD supercomputing power. Computers are already that much better at cryptographic problem-solving, thanks to Bitcoin itself.
SHA256 hash may be high-grade for its time, but am I correct in saying that all you need to beat it is more raw computing power? A large amount, but... no higher degree of complexity. Just power and time.
Some claims have been made that private keys have already been reverse engineered from public ones.
It does seem implausible, but presumably anybody who accomplished this task would end bitcoin and destroy a 100 billion dollar market. Probably a few teams working on it right now.
Presumably Satoshi knows precisely how the hashing function works. Wouldn't that help him to reverse engineer keys? If not, why not?
submitted by ElGuapissimo to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

LaqPay Coin

LaqPay Coin
LaQ Pay is a next-generation cryptocurrency.
LaQ Pay was written from scratch and designed over four years to realize the ideal of Bitcoin and represents the apex of cryptocurrency design. LaQ Pay is not designed to add features to Bitcoin, but rather improves Bitcoin by increasing simplicity, security and stripping out everything non-essential.
Some people have hyped the LaQ Pay Project as leading into "Bitcoin 3.0". The coin itself is not "Bitcoin 3.0", but is rather "Bitcoin 1.0". Bitcoin is a prototype crypto-coin. LaQ Pay was designed to be what Bitcoin would look like if it were built from scratch, to remedy the rough edges in the Bitcoin design.
  • no duplicate coin-base outputs
  • enforced checks for hash collisions
  • simple deterministic wallets
  • no transaction malleability
  • no signature malleability
  • removal of the scripting language
  • CoinJoin and normal transactions are indistinguishable
  • elimination of edge-cases that prevent independent node implementations
  • <=10 second transaction times
  • elimination of the need for mining to achieve blockchain consensus

Telegram : , ,
submitted by LaqPayPromo to u/LaqPayPromo [link] [comments]

Bitcoin - Cryptographic hash function - YouTube Hashing and Collisions KOLLABIERT BITCOIN NUN AUFGRUND DER HASH RIBBON? homeless vulnhub CTF walkthrough - Hash Collisions 8. Hashing with Chaining - YouTube

And for "b" to happen, you would need to find a collision on RIPEMD-160(SHA-256(pk)). As far as I know, then neither RIPEMD-160 nor SHA-256 is known to have any vulnerabilities to hash collision attacks. So somehow breaking both or randomly generation a key which hashes is exactly the same as another bitcoin address, is highly unlikely. Since Bitcoin addresses are basically random numbers, it is possible, although extremely unlikely, for two people to independently generate the same address. This is called a collision. If this happens, then both the original owner of the address and the colliding owner could spend money sent to that address. It would not be possible for the colliding person to spend the original owner's ... How does the bitcoin network recover in case of a hash collision in the block hash? Ask Question Asked 5 years, 3 months ago. ... After the download, it checks for itself that the blocks follow the rules of the bitcoin network and inserts them in its current blockchain. This algorithm assumes that any valid block in the blockchain has a unique hash that identifies it. What happens, if by ... A Hash or also called hash function is any algorithm that maps data of arbitrary length to data of a fixed length. The values returned by a hash function are called hash values, hash codes, hash sums, checksums or simply hashes. Recent development of internet payment networks and digital money, such as Bitcoin, also uses a form of 'hashing' for checksums, and has brought additional attention ... In the event two distinct inputs have the same output, it’s referred to as a cryptographic hash collision, making it imperative for a hash to have a strong collision resistance. Otherwise, the algorithm will be vulnerable to collision attacks, which threatens security. Collision resistance is born of two other forms of resistance. Pre-image Resistance. Under ideal circumstances, it’s ideal ...

[index] [3170] [11622] [36122] [36461] [7046] [11362] [20733] [465] [49645] [21062]

Bitcoin - Cryptographic hash function - YouTube

Editing Monitors : Check out our website: Follow Telusko on T... MIT 6.006 Introduction to Algorithms, Fall 2011 View the complete course: Instructor: Erik Demaine License: Creative Commons BY-N... Learn how to Brute-Force your Bitcoin core wallet using Hashcat. Get the script here: How does the hash function work in the world of Bitcoin mining? Peter Van Valkenburgh of the Coin Center explains how the hash function in Bitcoin uses entropy to select Bitcoin miners. What cryptographic hash functions are and what properties are desired of them. More free lessons at: Video by ...